I am curious to know what you think about the Electoral College. As many of you are aware, Mr. Trump lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, but won the Electoral College in significant fashion. Do you believe this is a fair system, and if so, why?

Fair may not be the word I'd choose, but 'functional' is. There is a distinct reason the founders created the EC, and it ties into the series of compromises that gave us Senate representation and the mix of state's rights and federal rights that have been tweaked ever since. The purpose in the 18th century was to keep the large urban areas, and states in which they were located from domination of government policies, to the detriment of rural locations. To this day, it still sort of works that way. Does it, once in a while, yield a result at odds with the overall will of the total electorate? Sure, but the alternative would rather quickly devolve into National elections completely contested in large urban areas. The actual results from our last General Election are testament to a sharply divided nation with two VERY distinct cultures.

My thought is this.
I'm not as schooled as you two fellas are so I'm not going to pretend to be.
I only learned of this system the other day, yes I live under a rock.
But from what I read, I'm not so sure I like that way of doing things.
I'm not saying it's the right way or the wrong way, just not the way I'd go about it.

Last edited by ChipznBeer on Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It made a ton of sense if you lived in, say, the more sparsely settled Virginia and wanted equal say for your state with New York state, which likely may have contained nearly 1/4 of the entire population of the US, or Pennsylvania and Massachusetts nearly as populous. Those 3 states, without skewing the system via the Senate apportionment, the Electoral College and the decision to count slaves as fractional citizens for the purpose of House of Representatives apportionment, could have determined the whole fate for all 13. Obviously, you weren't going to get the votes to ratify the Constitution without working out a deal, and this is our 'deal'. It is referred to as the Great Compromise and led the way out of the utterly horrible Articles of Confederation that had been in effect after we tossed the Brits out.

The odd thing is how well it really has worked, generally leading to fewer recounts and less disputes over elections, historically. As I say, not perfect, but functional to its intended purpose, if that makes any sense.

The Electoral College is a necessary evil. As Slick said, it's necessary to compensate for population density. But I am also a firm believer that the POTUS should be elected by the popular vote. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Whoever gets the most votes is who America wants.

So what is the solution?
America needs a 3rd major political party. I've been talking about this for years. You need a left party, a right party, and a centrist party. And no, the Tea Party doesn't count.
Worked properly, a three party system could eliminate the need for the Electoral College. Look at the Utopian Paradise of Canada and a multitude of European nations with multiple major political parties. The popular vote always wins. Even in countries that have run-off elections, it's the popular vote that wins the day.
America's two party system with an Electoral College doesn't work very well. America needs to THINK more about the votes they cast.
Can you image a sitting President who only got 38% of the votes? America needs to experience a minority government. In a minority government different political parties are forced to work with each other. They need to work together and to compromise in order to get things done.
A three party system doesn't completely compensate for population density ... but it would be a far cry better than the Electoral College.

not sure that a third party solves ALL the problems, especially if one conjures up the inevitable(with the EC taken away): imagine a US political party which essentially focuses solely on the concerns and issues of the 100 largest metro areas in the nation with zero regard for the rest of the place. They'd win, every time, at the Presidential level, and likely own the House. The Senate, divided between three separate parties, would be where most tempering would occur.
Bottom line is this, no matter what ANY of us thinks, the chance that the EC is abolished hovers between slim and none. It would require an Amendment to the Constitution, ultimately ratified by 2/3 of the states. Now, get back to how we ended up with the compromise of 1783, and do a quick count of say red and blue states, to keep it really simple. Also, note that the GOP has only won a SINGLE popular vote in the past 6 Presidential elections and has spent years pissing off the growing demographic groups in the population.......